mm 


^''-'-SiYi 


■:-n’-:iiU'r^rr.£ri: 


mm 


iliii 


mMm 


Library  of  the 

University  of  North  Carolina 

Endowed  bv  the  Dialectic  and  Pliilan- 
thropic  Societies 


BY 

Albert  R.  Bond,  D.  D. 
Editorial  Secretary 


i 


PUBLISHED  BY 

EDUCATION  BOARD,  SOUTHERN  BAPTIST  CONVENTION 

BIRMINGHAM,  ALABAMA 
.  -  ^  ■  ► 


1023 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2019  with  funding  from 
University  of  North  Carolina  at  Chapel  Hill 


https://archive.org/details/surveyofsouthernOObond 


P  93if 


A  SURVEY  OF  SOUTHERN  ILLITERACY 


gVERY  child  has  the  right  to  be  well  born  and  educated.  The  duties  and 

privileges  of  life  attach  to  these  two  vital  rights.  Vast  sums  of  money 
have  been  spent  to  make  possible  and  permanent  a  state  of  civilization  in 
which  every  child  could  be  assured  these  rights.  Individuals,  corporate  en¬ 
dowments,  religious  and  benevolent  organizations  and  the  State  have  co¬ 
operated  in  the  task  of  creating  conditions  that  would  make  it  possible  for 
a  child  to  have  a  fitting  chance  in  the  struggle. 

The  problem  of  illiteracy  well  deserves  the  serious  consideration  now  being 
given  to  it.  Different  sections  of  the  United  States  have  distinguishing  prob¬ 
lems  which  arise  from  the  character  of  its  resident  population.  The  types  of 
the  population  vary  with  many  factors  which  may  not  be  discussed  in  this 
survey.  Three  elements  enter  into  the  problem  of  Southern  illiteracy: 
(1)  The  native  white  population;  (2)  The  negro  population;  (3)  The 
foreign-born  population.  Since  the  South  has  only  a  small  percentage  of 
a  foreign-born  population,  we  omit  this  factor  from  this  survey  of  Southern 
illiteracy. 

The  term  illiterate  as  used  by  the  Census  Bureau  applies  to  any  one 
ten  years  old  and  over  who  cannot  write  in  any  language.  The  English  lan¬ 
guage  is  not  made  a  test.  In  general  the  term  is  intended  to  include  all  those 
who  have  not  had  any  education. 

The  present  survey  is  based  upon  the  United  States  Census  Report  for 
1920,  which  is  the  latest  source  of  information.  Certain  comparisons  are 
made  with  former  census  reports.  We  deal  with  the  constituent  States  of 
the  Southern  Baptist  Convention  and  then  with  a  group  of  these  States  which 
are  dictinctively  Southern. 


I.  CENSUS  1920. 

1.  Total  Illiteracy 

The  Southern  Baptist  Convention  has  17  constituent  States  and  the 
District  of  Columbia.  Some  of  this  list  are  not  distinctively  Southern 
States  but  we  include  all  of  them  in  the  first  part  of  this  survey.  The  aver¬ 
age  for  the  United  States  for  the  total  population  is  6.0  and  for  the  Con¬ 
vention  States  is  10.7.  We  list  the  Convention  States  with  percentages;  the 
number  in  parenthesis  before  each  State  indicates  its  rank  in  the  total  list 
for  the  United  States;  for  example,  (1)  Louisiana  21.9  means  that  Louisiana 
has  the  greatest  percentage  of  illiteracy  in  the  United  States;  (12)  Arkansas 


3 


9.4  means  that  Arkansas  is  the  12th  in  order  in  the  United  States  in  per¬ 
centage  of  illiterates. 


(1.) 

La. 

21.9 

(12) 

Ark. 

9.T 

(2) 

S.  C. 

18.1 

(13) 

Ky. 

8.4 

(3) 

Miss. 

17.2 

(14) 

Tex. 

8.3 

(4) 

Ala. 

16.1 

(20) 

Md. 

5.6 

(5) 

N.  M. 

15.6 

(26) 

Okla. 

3.8 

(6) 

Ga. 

15.3 

(27) 

Ill. 

3.4 

(8) 

N.  C. 

13.1 

(31) 

Mo. 

3.0 

(9) 

Va. 

11.2 

(34) 

D.  C. 

2.8 

(10) 

Tenn. 

10.3 

Convention 

States 

av.  10.7 

(11) 

Fla. 

9.6 

U.  S. 

Average 

6.0 

;  list 

13  States  have 

a  percentage  of  illiteracy 

higher 

than  the 

average  for  the  United  States;  eight  rank  higher  than  the  average  per¬ 
centage  for  this  group.  The  eighteen  Convention  States  rank  from  one  to 
thirty-four,  inclusive,  in  the  list  for  the  entire  United  States;  within  this 
same  number  seventeen  other  states  rank  in  percentage.  If  we  omit  from 
this  list  New  Mexico,  Maryland,  Oklahoma,  Illinois,  Missouri,  and  the  Dis¬ 
trict  of  Columbia,  we  have  twelve  Southern  States,  and  these  rank  the 
highest  percentage  in  illiteracy  for  the  United  States  with  the  one  exception 
of  Arizona  which  has  the  same  percentage  as  Georgia. 

Two  factors  help  to  make  this  high  percentage  for  the  Southern  States: 

(1)  A  large  negro  population.  The  percentage  of  negro  illiteracy  is  largest 
for  these  twelve  States.  States  other  than  Southern  have  a  large  foreign- 
born  population  but  the  ratio  of  negro  illiteracy  is  higher  than  that  for 
foreign-born,  the  figures  being  for  negro  22.9,  for  foreign-born  whites  13.1. 

(2)  Mountain  population.  In  addition  to  the  negro  population  five  States 
— Georgia,  North  Carolina,  Virginia,  Tennessee,  Kentucky — have  also  a 
very  large  population  in  the  mountain  sections,  whose  inaccessibility  ren¬ 
ders  it  difficult  to  maintain  an  adequate  school  system. 

2.  Native  White  Illiteracy 

The  percentage  for  native  white  illiteracy  for  the  United  States  is  2.0. 
We  list  the  Convention  States  with  the  percentage  for  each;  the  figure  in 
parenthesis  indicates  the  rank  of  each  State  in  the  list  for  the  Unitd  States 
for  white  illiteracy. 


(1) 

N.  M. 

11.6 

(11) 

Ark. 

4.5 

(2) 

La. 

10.5 

(12) 

Miss. 

3.6 

(3) 

N.  C. 

8.2 

(13) 

Tex. 

3.0 

(4) 

Tenn. 

7.3 

(14) 

Fla. 

2.9 

(5) 

Ky. 

7.0 

(15) 

Okla. 

2.3 

(6) 

S.  C. 

6.5 

(17) 

Mo. 

2.0 

(7) 

Ala. 

6.3 

(18) 

Md. 

1.8 

(8) 

Va. 

5.9 

(25) 

Ill. 

0.8 

(9) 

Ga. 

5.4 

(44) 

D.  C. 

0.3 

4 


Of  this  list  fourteen  States  have  a  percentage  higher  than  for  the 
United  States.  Five  of  the  first  nine  have  a  large  mountain  population. 
New  Mexico  heads  the  list  for  native  white  illiteracy  for  the  entire  United 
States.  With  the  exception  of  New  Mexico  and  West  Virginia,  the  twelve 
Southern  States  stand  at  the  head  of  all  the  States  for  native  white  illiteracy. 
Florida  has  the  lowest  rate  of  the  Southern  States. 


3 .  Negro  Illiteracy 


Louisiana  38.5 
Alabama  3 1 .3 
Mississippi  29.3 
S.  Carolina  29.3 
Georgia  29.1 
N.  Carolina  24.5 
Virginia  23.5 
Tennessee  22.4 
Arkansas  21.8 


Florida  21.5 
Kentucky  21.0 
Maryland  18.2 
Texas  17.8 
Oklahoma  12.4 
Missouri  12.1 
Dist.  of  Col.  8.6 
Illinois  6.7 
New  Mexico  4.3 


The  United  States  average  for  negro  illiteracy  is  22.9.  Twelve 
Southern  States  show  a  higher  percentage  than  this.  This  would  naturally 
be  expected  since  the  Northern  States  have  a  better  type  of  negro  popu¬ 
lation  than  in  the  South.  Then,  too,  the  negro  conditions  in  the  South  are 
more  difficult  to  improve  than  in  the  North.  Economic  and  racial  elements 
enter  the  problem  of  elevating  the  educational  status  of  the  negro. 


II.  TWENTY- YEAR  COMPARISON 


A  comparison  of  the  Census  Report  will  show  a  marked  improvement 
in  the  reduction  of  Southern  illiteracy  during  the  last  twenty  years.  The 
following  tables  will  indicate  this. 


1.  Native  White  Illiteracy 


New  Mexico 

Louisiana 

North  Carolina 

Tennessee 

Kentucky 

South  Carolina 

Alabama 

Virginia 

Georgia 

Arkansas 

Mississippi 

Texas 

Florida 

Oklahoma 


Census 


1920 

11.6 

10.5 

8.2 

7.3 
7.0 
6.5 

6.3 

5.9 

5.4 

4.5 

3.6 
3.0 

2.9 
2.3 


1910 

14.9 

13.4 

12.3 

9.7 

10.0 

10.3 
9.9 
8.0 

7.8 
7.0 

5.2 

4.3 
5.0 

3.3 


1900 

29.4 
17.3 

19.5 
14.2 
12.8 

13.6 

14.8 

11.1 

11.9 

11.6 
8.0 
6.1 
8.6 
7.7 


5 


Louisiana 

2  Negro  Illiteracy 

38.5 

48.4 

61.1 

Alabama 

31.3 

40.1 

57.4 

South  Carolina 

29.3 

38.7 

52.8 

Mississippi 

29.3 

35.6 

49.1 

Georgia 

29.1 

36.5 

52.4 

North  Carolina 

24,5 

31.9 

47.6 

Virginia 

23.5 

30.0 

44.6 

Here  we  list  only  the  seven  states  that  have  a  percentage  higher  than  the 

average  22.9,  for  the 

Census 

negro  illiteracy  for  the  United  States. 

3.  Twenty-Year  Reduction 

Native  White  Illiteracy 

1920-1910  1910-1900 

1920-1900 

North  Carolina 

4.1 

7.2 

11.3 

South  Carolina 

3.8 

3.3 

7.1 

Alabama 

3.6 

4.9 

8.5 

New  Mexico 

3.3 

15.5 

17.8 

Kentucky 

3.0 

2.8 

5.8 

Louisiana 

2.9 

3.9 

6.8 

Arkansas 

2.5 

4.6 

7.1 

Tennessee 

2.4 

4.5 

4.9 

Georgia 

2.4 

4.1 

6.5 

Florida 

2.1 

3.6 

5.7 

Virginia 

2.1 

3.1 

5.2 

Mississippi 

1.6 

2.8 

4.4 

Texas 

1.3 

1.8 

3.1 

Oklahoma 

1.0 

4.4 

S.4 

Louisiana 

Negro  Illiteracy 

9.9 

12.7 

22.6 

South  Carolina 

9.4 

14.1 

23.5 

Alabama 

8.8 

17.3 

26.1 

Georgia 

7.4 

15.9 

23.3 

North  Carolina 

7.4 

15.7 

23.1 

Virginia 

6.5 

14.6 

21.1 

Mississippi 

6.3 

13.5 

19.8 

III.  LARGEST  PERCENTAGE  IN  REDUCTION  IN  ILLITERACY 

In  the  following  lists  we  give  the  seven  states  that  rank  highest  in  the 
percentage  by  which  illiteracy  was  reduced  in  the  periods  indicated.  To 
illustrate:  North  Carolina  reduced  her  native  white  illiteracy  by  4.1  per  cent 
in  the  census  of  1920  over  the  census  of  1910. 


6 


1.  Native  White  Illiteracy 

Census  1920  over 

1910 

N.  Carolina 

4.1 

Kentucky 

3.0 

S.  Carolina 

3.8 

Louisiana 

2.9 

Alabama 

3.6 

Arkansas 

2.5 

New  Mexico  3.3 

Census  1910  over 

1900 

N.  Mexico 

15.5 

Tennessee 

4.5 

N.  Carolina 

7.2 

Oklahoma 

4.4 

Alabama 

4.9 

Georgia 

4.1 

Arkansas 

4.6 

Census  1920  over 

1900 

N.  Mexico 

17.8 

Arkansas 

7.1 

N.  Carolina 

11.3 

Louisiana 

6.8 

Alabama 

8.5 

Georgia 

6.5 

S.  Carolina 

7.1 

2.  Negro  Illiteracy 

Census  1920  over  1910 

Louisiana 

9.9 

N.  Carolina 

7.4 

S.  Carolina 

9.4 

Virginia 

6.5 

Alabama 

8.8 

Mississippi 

6.3 

Georgia 

7.4 

Census  1910  over 

1900 

Alabama 

17.3 

S.  Carolina 

14.1 

Georgia 

15.9 

Mississippi 

13.5 

N.  Carolina  15.7 

Louisiana 

12.7 

Virginia 

14.6 

Census  1920  over 

1900 

Alabama 

26.1 

Louisiana 

22.6 

S.  Carolina 

23.5 

Virginia 

21.1 

Georgia 

23.3 

Mississippi 

19.8 

N.  Carolina  23.1 

3.  Total  Illiteracy 

Census  1920  over 

1910 

S.  Carolina 

7.6 

N.  Carolina 

5.4 

Louisiana 

7.1 

Mississippi 

5.2 

Alabama 

6.8 

N.  Mexico 

4.6 

Georgia 

5.4 

7 


IV.  PERCENTAGE  PROPORTIONATE  REDUCTION 

1.  Native  White  Illiteracy 


1920  over  1910  1920 

over  1900  1910 

over  1900 

Oklahoma 

70.1 

30.3 

57.1 

Florida 

66.2 

42.0 

41.8 

Arkansas 

61.2 

35.7 

39.6 

New  Mexico 

61.2 

22.1 

52.7 

Alabama 

S7.5 

36.3 

33.1 

North  Carolina 

57.5 

33.3 

37.0 

Mississippi 

55.0 

30.7 

35.0 

Georgia 

54.4 

30.7 

34.4 

South  Carolina 

52.2 

36.9 

25.0 

Texas 

50.8 

30.2 

29.5 

Virginia 

46.8 

26.2 

27.9 

Kentucky 

45.3 

30.0 

21.9 

Louisiana 

39.3 

21.6 

22.5 

Tennessee 

34.5 

24.7 

31.7 

In  this  table  we 

give  for  each  period  the  proportionate  percentage  of 

reduction  in  illiteracy.  For  example:  In  period 

1  Oklahoma  reduced  its  il- 

literacy  by  57.1  per 

cent.  This  was  over  one-half.  But  in  period  2  the 

reduction  was  only  30.3  per  cent,  which  was  less  than  one-half. 

Order  of  Proportionate  Reduction 

1910-1900 

1920-1910 

1920-1900 

1. 

Oklahoma 

Florida 

Oklahoma 

2. 

New  Mexico 

South  Carolina 

Florida 

3. 

Florida 

Alabama 

Arkansas  and 

N.  M. 

4. 

Arkansas 

Arkansas 

5. 

North  Carolina 

North  Carolina 

Alabama  and  N.  C. 

6. 

Mississippi 

Georgia  and  Miss. 

7. 

Georgia 

- - 

-  Mississippi 

8. 

Alabama 

Oklahoma 

Georgia 

9. 

Tennessee 

Texas 

South  Carolina 

10. 

Texas 

Kentucky 

Texas 

11. 

Virginia 

Virginia 

Virginia 

12. 

South  Carolina 

Tennessee 

Kentucky 

13. 

Louisiana 

New  Mexico 

Louisiana 

14. 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Tennessee 

In  this  table  the  States  are  listed  in  the  order  of  greatest  proportion- 

ate 

percentage  of  reduction  in  illiteracy. 

Six  States — South  Carolina,  Kentucky,  Arkansas,  Alabama,  Florida 

and 

T  exas — increased 

the  per  centage  of  reduction  in  period  2 

over  per- 

iod 

1.  The  other  eight  States  lost  in  the  rate 

of  reduction. 

2.  Negro  Illiteracy 

1920  over  1900  1920 

over  1910  1910  over  1900 

North  Carolina 

48.5 

23.2 

32.9 

Virginia 

47.3 

21.6 

32.7 

Alabama 

45.5 

21.9 

30.1 

Georgia 

44.5 

20.3 

30.3 

South  Carolina 

42.9 

24.3 

26.3 

Mississippi 

40.3 

17.7 

27.5 

Louisiana 

36.9 

20.4 

20.8 

8 


For  period  1  the  order  in  which  the  States  rank  according  to  the 
highest  percentage  of  proportionate  reduction  in  illiteracy  is  this: 
1— North  Carolina;  2— Virginia;  3— Georgia;  4— Alabama ; 5— Mississippi ; 
6 — South  Carolina;  7 — ^Louisiana. 

For  Period  2  the  order  is:  1— South  Carolina;  2— North  Carolina; 
3— Alabama;  4— Virginia;  5— Louisiana;  6— Georgia;  7— Mississippi. 

V.  SOME  OBSERVATIONS 

IMPROVEMENT — The  statistics  presented  in  this  survey  show  the 
marked  improvement  in  the  reduction  of  illiteracy  and  especially  white 
illiteracy.  In  the  table  “Percentage  Proportionate  Reduction,”  it  will  be 
observed  that  the  1920  Census  shows  that  the  Southern  States  had  a  pro¬ 
portionate  percentage  of  reduction  of  illiteracy  over  the  1900  figures  that 
ranges  from  66.2  for  Florida  to  34.5  for  Tennessee.  Every  Southern  State 
reduced  its  percentage  of  illiteracy  in  each  of  the  two  census  reports, 
1910,  1920.  This  applies  for  total  illiteracy,  native  white  illiteracy  and 
negro  illiteracy.  Special  efforts  have  been  made  by  a  number  of  the  states 
to  reduce  illiteracy  by  holding  adult  schools.  While  the  adult  school  does 
not  carry  its  pupils  very  far  in  the  curriculum,  it  does  render  them  able  to 
read  and  write  ordinary  English.  Further,  the  public  school  system  in 
the  South  has  made  wonderful  progress  within  this  twenty-year  period. 

A  RURAL  PROBLEM — The  percentage  for  rural  illiteracy  is  higher 
than  that  for  urban  illiteracy.  The  South  has  a  larger  rural  than  urban 
population.  While  great  advances  have  been  made  in  the  rural  life  during 
this  period,  the  rural  conditions  do  not  yet  have  the  advantages  of  cities  of 
the  South  or  of  the  rural  conditions  in  the  North.  Because  of  the  inade¬ 
quate  school  facilities,  the  rural  communities  have  been  backward.  This 
fact  has  a  signal  example  in  the  mountain  sections  where  the  people  retain 
a  pure  Anglo-Saxon  lineage  but  who  have  continued  backward  in  civilization 
because  of  the  difficulty  of  travel.  But  even  in  these  mountain  sections 
great  improvements  have  occurred,  especially  since  the  coming  of  the 
automobile  and  consequently  of  better  roads. 

A  BAPTIST  PROBLEM — Baptists  constitute  a  large  percentage  of 
the  population  of  the  South,  and  especially  in  the  rural  districts.  Hence  the 
problem  becomes  intensely  a  Baptist  one.  Baptists  must  cooperate  with 
the  various  agencies,  local  and  State,  to  secure  a  better  school  system  and 
to  provide  economic  conditions  which  make  it  possible  for  every  child  to 
have  an  adequate  school  opportunity.  The  negro  illiteracy  will  be  reduced 
to  a  larger  degree  during  the  next  census  period  because  it  will  be  recalled 
that  during  the  last  twenty-year  period  there  remained  vast  numbers  of 
negroes  who  were  born  within  the  shadow  of  the  Civil  War  and  who  did 
not  have  the  privilege  of  school.  Now  that  negroes  have  the  advantage  of 
the  pubUc  school,  negro  illiteracy  will  decrease  rapidly,  thus  reducing  the 
high  average  of  illiteracy  for  the  South. 

VI.  GRAPHS  AND  TABLE 

We  give  several  graphs  and  a  table  of  statistics  that  set  forth  some 
of  the  results  in  this  survey. 


9 


Illiteracy  in  tKe  ConuentionStates  -Census  19201910 


STATES 

PerCx 

ALA. 

16.1 

22.9 

AR.K.. 

9.4 

12.6 

D.op  C. 

2.8 

4.9 

FLA. 

9.6 

13.8 

GA. 

15.3 

20.7 

ILL. 

3.4 

3.7 

KY. 

8.4 

12.1 

LA. 

21.9 

29.0 

MD. 

5.6 

7.2 

MISS. 

17.2 

224 

MO. 

3.0 

4.3 

N.M. 

15.6 

20.2 

N.C 

lai 

18.5 

OKLA. 

3.8 

5.6 

s.c. 

16.1 

25.7 

TENN. 

10.3 

13.6 

TEX. 

6.3 

9.9 

VA. 

11.2 

15.2 

CON.STS. 

10.7 

14.6 

u.s. 

6.0 

7.7 

30 


1920 

1910 


10 


11 


o 

I 

oo 

oo 

OJ 


o. 

NT 


O. 

rO 


O 

DO 

n  'I 


o. 

c\2 


0& 

OJ 


OJ 

■4-^ 

O 

GO 


O- 


o- 


Od 

U-l 

o 


oo 


Ui 

I- 


>§ 
!^i2 


lf)lO 

(\J  lO 

cO>t 

oo 

lOrO 

rOrO 

Olo 

in  oo 

vOfO 

Ooo 

OilO 

0)<O 

OcO 
—  O 

<0 

K  cvi 
C\J 

^C\I 

vOO* 

N 

id  CO 

•Og) 

^  oi 

cdoj 

ol 

c6t^ 

id  id 
rsj 

V  O  -J  <  <  cd 

2  «r>  <  >  d  < 


12 


ON 

Q 

Z 


<VJ 

OS 


u 

a 

H 

u 

z 

Oh 

u 

K 

H 

D 

O 

c/3 


W 

O 

< 

o 

(/J 

< 

w 


o 

hH 

H 

< 

ID 

PM 

O 

PM 


Oi 

W 

> 

O 

Q 

iz; 


c/3 

psP 

W 


o 

pp 

o 

w 

z 

o 

< 

w 

H 

l-H 

ffi 


5  o 
Pi  § 
O  25 


pq 

I 

Z 

o 

I— I 

w 

pq 

o 

Pm 


pq 

w 

> 

o 

Q 

Z 


W 

H 

J-H 

W 


w 

> 

hH 

H 

<5 

Z 


(/I 

w 

H 

<3 

pq 

w 

H 

t— I 

hJ 

D 


o 

1—1 

0\ 


0\ 


a 

Vh 

aj 


o 

bo 

<u 

Z 


MU 

C 

u 

O 

pq 

I 

c 

*S 

o 

[ii 


(U 

4-> 


<u 

4-* 

u 

V 


u 

V 


V 

•4-> 

03 

u 

V 


V 

:>U93 

o\ 

VO 

Os  CO 

tx 

1— 1 

o 

CM 

CO 

CM 

to* 

NO 

tx 

NO 

os 

CM 

4-> 

o3 

U. 

J9^J 

CM 

CM 

CM 

^  CO 

CO 

CM 

a 

Js* 

CM 

CM 

Tf 

ocj 

1-^ 

to 

to 

CM 

CO 

1^ 

Ov 

to 

1-H 

o 

CM  VO 

to 

Ov 

^s 

to 

NO 

rs 

I'H 

<o 

1-H 

1-H 

CO 

1-H 

to 

1—1  r-H 

On 

On 

CO 

1—1 

CT? 

<ry\ 

NfN 

OO 

Ns 

NO 

*— ' 

o\ 

00  00 

CM 

o 

1-H 

CO 

CM 

vO 

Tf 

to 

Os 

O 

d^ 

Ov 

1-H 

h-i 

6 

CM 

£2 

CO 

9>  '=5 

29 

CM 

CO 

o 

1— • 

00 

T-^ 

NO 

t-H 

eg 

<Ni 

NO 

Z 

to 

CO 

rj- 

tH 

1^ 

00  NO 

CO  1-H 

to 

CO 

tN* 

1—1 

T-H 

VO 

CM 

CM 

CO 

Cm 

1-H 

to 

to 

a 

4-» 

o 

H 


;U90 


o 


o 

H 


;u93 

a9j 


o 


xn  tr^ 

CO 

o 

Tf  fO 

IT)  y—i 


oO<Mi— tTTTfvoOOQQtnvOi— tON 
OOCq^— 

or^»-^r^voLooN»-^'i^ON'^’^i— <T-H^ 

o^Tr'^^c^ror**^^’^ood'^Cco^o^ 

t^vO0QO\CMi— iCNJONON'^t^ONt^CMTf* 

OJ  IT)  OO  OCMiOC^lOi— lO^CO 

1— t^rrHi-Hf-Ti— tCNi  1— 1»— ii— tf— icsT 


o 

On 

eg  CM 
fO  00 

to  XT) 


'  On  CO  X  •«  w  /  —  »  • 

n'OCMOO'^'^^^OOOnOnCO 

'  CM  CM  CM  T-i  CM  T-H  On 


f— llOtOX^OCO’^^COCMrHtOCOi— •NOCM’^ 

egooNOOcoTi-fosptoi— it^ONt^»^^NOi— I 

CA  CM^  o^ o  o^  NO  to  NO  o^  CO  NO 

o  eg'tCi-H  o  Tf'tC  NococotCtsT'^^co^ONOvo 

coot^»^»^oocovotococoN^Tri--ii-Ht^io 

t^co  CO  ^ ‘  CO  CO  1— I  C<^ev  CM  00  to  CM  t^iO 

^  f— (  CM  to  ^  y~^  ^  CM  r-H  1—1  1—1  1—1  CO 


CO  to 
VO  ' 
(»  CO 

00  oC 

tt  CO 

1— t  Cm 

00 


COOONOtOT-it^OtoCMCOi-HfOtO'^COrroOtOON 

i-HT-Hod^*CNNd^o6o6oNCMTrTfcMpNCM’ 

COCM  CMCM  CMcOi-hCM*— <  CM»— '04CM 


K  CO  ^ 


i  CM 


OtOcoONtONOCOO’^cooQCO'^'£?CMCMroCM»-^ 

^Trtoco^r^'^coo^CMcMe>*OCMcoioCMNO 

NO  CM  O  NO  ^  Ti-00t0CMNDCM'^tOoc0»-H 

ooCoot/^»— 'OQNo'trTtooo  coTf*i— lONogeNfcM 
1— tONOr-i'^OCOO^-t  COi— (OOt^oCM*^ 
CM  CM  CMCM  1— It— It-i»— ‘00 


03 

4-> 

o 

H 


?U33 

a9tj 


o 

z 


•M 

o 

H 


;U90 

J9^ 


o 

z 


oj 

-l-> 

o 

H 


u 

■M 

cS 

-l-> 

173 


§rOCMCht^ior^CSliot^i— iCNOa'OOO'OCSt^^^ 

OCX3T)-CNIO“S^CSICq\0'OTfrOCS)CSlrtUSCSl 
■rrr^-^'— itM'OroWvi^ooro'j^iJ^cs'^t^'OCg 
ro’^OO'^J^^SO'^'^CNru^iO’^OOTr'csroro 

t^'00^l^0^u^0^^o0^0l0  TJ-T— (I— iioj-^CMto 

'Of'O  <\J00i— I'— llOi— I  LOI— I'^iCOlOl^O 


00 


OsfOt-HCO-^O^OCSTfrOMUi-ioOOC^f^OO'-i’-H 

OOo'vd'OinDKDrrjr^jcsi^vO'rf'OOOrolNifO 

»— (  T— (  C<1  1 — I  1-H  1 — I  CO  ’ — ' 


colC^oO^:^'-^Sp■'^■C>“St^C^O■'^'0’-^cot^OO 
CS'ct-csivo'^i^'^Ot^io'Oiot^ioON^T— iinn- 
00  c-^t^  >2  CO  C7\  lO  O '.i^CSl  Cn 

t-Ti-Hi-hCsT  i-T  csf  0\  c<^ ’— I  tC  i-TcsTcsirO 

CO 

f-H 


co■cr<^at^ooo^coT^u^oOTt•| 


I  op 


cooo?aoocs'oC')t-(ONcor^csc>coc^ONCo 


o  t>  lo  lo ' 
^  N  gN  vs  CSl  ' 


l^cOopCMVO-rrO^ 

rH'— lo5'rr»— 'OnCCJ'T 


T— ir->'cr\r>'Oo\'OiiscMOr^ 
O  00(N  CO  I-HCOCOCS 

T— (  I— 1  CO  Tt 


fO“^coO\'^000'JSoCVOOvOCMCotOcoOCTsO 

vo4c5csi“sot>^oDcocsi,-;odcsisdl'.;coiocNi 


rt-T-HOOs'Pr^^t^OOCq'OON'^oOCNQNCO'^CV 

CNi— i^\oO\oO“sv3'cr'o,— i'Tt— 

-rj-  VO  <— I  CSJ  O^co  CSl^O  lO  CO -ct-  t-v  00  'O 

irT '-P  co^vcTrJ  c4M— I  irTcsi  rCirp-^cToo  i-ToO  CNi 

VO  Tl-  VO  ro  ^  00  "-I  CM  T)- CM  o  CO  CO  O  00  "cr 

T-l  t— I  I— I  CM 


X/- 


CM''a-CMOVOu-)''tCOco^' 
ov£iOvicot;^CM;oavioCM 
\^Tj-toNOCN.roO»— <toON 


ro  ^  ^  CO  O 


CO 


CP  On  CM  ■'f  OVl^OO  00'OcoCM^covo^'^>-^<» 

^  cm"  -iD"  rMcM-'-'O 


I 

I 

rt 

3 

a 

'o 

u 


° 

rt  rt  4J 

s  2.a 

rt  h 


o3 

c 


03 

o3  ^ 


rt  •r-'  02 
TJ  bfl'r| 
.rt  V,  O 

J?  o  c 
O  o  ; 


U)  ^ 

.z:  p  CO  X  ►>. 
C  3  t;  CO  to  ? 

^  1- ^  4;  o 


o  ^ 

.  o  o  o 

Q,  *r^  ^  ^  i> 

>>  rt-d  p,.^  5  C3  qj 

Mi  C  c-^  Eu  tn 

CJ  rt  ca  ^  pg  o  ^ 

o  M^MUMU  ^  “ 

Js  cn  V)  ?  PCX 

^^ZZOcajHH 


CO 

1) 
4>> 

a 
(/) 

.t2  V 
tyo.t! 
.b:  c 


13 


r 

k' 

1  -  ; 

i’  » 

•  i 


I 


.1  I 


r 


:  fe 


f 


>  i 

i-. 


\ 


.  r 


^  A  i 


^  -i 


'  -fl  .  'TiHW7‘'^5'"'‘’"r/*^ 


V  C  ►  *  I 

r  .  ^  fc  •  .  V 


■i»' 


if-' 


■•'A* 


i\  *  ',' 


■>  '  - 


\  ” 


j  . 


liCJ.' 


,C  '•«?!* 


1-. « 


fll  > 


f 


e.  V 


.  .■• 


«• 


K 


I  - 


e: 


^  ►: 


^■iT*  _ y.’ 

S'-.  .  - .  ' 


jr  r;:**  *  i^sa*. 

>  \.  . 


.-S'  -.  ,  ►'■■  .  , 


m* 


■V  V- 

'  ■%  ...A 

:  ■’ ^  - 
_  ■'  ,  ‘^4--  '  ■' 


y  .-I*  >>' 


-T  - 


*;*  .  *  ^ 


& 


■*.'  ..'^■1 

-  “  • 

V^,  _ 

AL^ 

*»  r* • 

T. 

^  * 

=.'  ■'* 

l» 

^.  5r-V,^'* 
-►  ■» 

ij:-*  “■ 

'm- 

'^ ■  4>-  .- 

'  ^ 

'0 

fr  f 


.  ■■'^■ 


■T  » 


«« 


ft  • 


V  «.* 


k  Sj. 


T. 


-  1* 


--  *.,.-■ 


...Ji 


THE  NORTH  CAROLINA  COLLECTION 


